There is ongoing concern for contamination of dental patients with respect to certain viruses and diseases. It has been reported that some diseases can be transmitted through the normal program of dental prophylaxis. Consequently, greater attention has been directed towards medical tools, and especially dental tools which can economically be used only once and still be discarded.
One area which has heretofore evaded the attempt at disposability involved the handpiece that a dentist uses to drive certain working instrumentalities that come in contact with a person's teeth. For certain types of endeavors, such as tooth drilling, it is frequently required to use extremely high speed air mechanisms in excess of 500,000 revolutions per minute. One such company, Oral Safe has shown that it can manufacture such a device.
Frequently, however, certain other dental endeavors, more particularly involving dental hygiene, do not require such high rotation. In fact, for the purposes of a hygienist, rotation speeds less than 30,000 rpm are adequate for providing buffing, polishing and burring. To date, until the instant application, no instrumentality is known to exist capable of this lower speed rotation in which the output shaft is directly driven as an air turbine.
Accordingly, the instant invention provides a direct drive between an air current and an output shaft at one extremity of a disposable prophy angle. Heretofore, a traditional methodology by which a disposable prophy angle had been utilized involves attaching the disposable prophy angle to a hand piece via a chuck and collet assembly. An air motor is housed within the hand piece. One problem with such a technique involves subsequent need for sterilization of the hand piece housing and collet/chuck assembly within which the air motor is carried.
It is now recognized that the cost of autoclaving should be factored into any price comparison that is to be made between disposable and non-disposable instrumentalities used in the medical and dental environment. Moreover, since autoclaving necessitates down time for the sterilization process, multiple set of instruments (which are traditionally quite expensive) are required. This itself adds to the cost of using non-disposables. When the labor associated with autoclaving is also taken into account, it appears that disposables compare quite favorably both from a cost perspective and certainly from a hygienic perspective.
The following prior art reflects the state of the art of which applicant is aware and is included herewith to discharge applicant's acknowledged duty to disclose relevant prior art.
______________________________________ INVENTOR PATENT NO. ISSUE DATE ______________________________________ Schmitz 263,814 September, 1882 Swisher et al 1,999,488 April, 1935 Roelke 2,025,779 December, 1935 Goldenberg 2,300,828 November, 1942 Shotton 2,315,016 March, 1943 Greenberg 2,328,270 July, 1943 Wiseman 3,163,934 January, 1965 Hoffmeister et al 3,229,369 January, 1966 Graham 3,727,313 April, 1973 Brahler 3,740,853 June, 1973 Danne et al 3,987,550 October, 1976 Flatland 4,053,983 October, 1977 Girard 4,182,041 January, 1980 Warden et al 4,266,933 May, 1981 Huang 5,020,994 June, 1991 Witherby 5,028,233 July, 1991 Falcon et al 5,040,978 August, 1991 Butler 5,120,220 June, 1992 Fed. Republic of Germany 646,193 June, 1937 Advertisement for Oralsafe Disposable Handpiece Dentistry August 1992 Today ______________________________________
It is respectfully submitted that none of these prior art devices teach singly, nor render obvious when considered in any conceivable combination, the nexus of the instant invention as especially claimed hereinafter.